# of dead US troops in afghanistan

[husker]

i would mostly like savage's answer to this question, but others can chime in.

there have been more US troops killed in afghanistan under obama's presidency (18 months) than bush's (7 1/2 years). funny how no daily body counts aren't being done on liberal networks like when bush was president.

savage, you have consistently said bush/cheney are murders/war criminals or something to that extent. how do you feel about your great intellectual savior obama now? the number of dead are going to keep rising, and nothing is going to come of that third world country. we will be pulling out just like vietnam. i said this a long time ago.

[flarendep1]

Wow, I was not aware of this.

Both sides cover the war poorly which IMO is why the public gets war weary. If the public were shown the progress and the positive sides all along maybe opinions would be different.

[husker]

Wow, I was not aware of this.

Both sides cover the war poorly which IMO is why the public gets war weary. If the public were shown the progress and the positive sides all along maybe opinions would be different.

i don't think there is ever going to be any meaningful or lasting progress there. the country is 200 years behind us, we aren't going to change things without trillions of OUR dollars, thousands of OUR soldiers lives, and us being there indefinitely. the place is a pit, just like vietnam, and we should have been out of there a LONG time ago.

at least iraq was in the modern world and things could be accomplished there.

[savage1]

i would mostly like savage's answer to this question, but others can chime in.

there have been more US troops killed in afghanistan under obama's presidency (18 months) than bush's (7 1/2 years). funny how no daily body counts aren't being done on liberal networks like when bush was president.

savage, you have consistently said bush/cheney are murders/war criminals or something to that extent. how do you feel about your great intellectual savior obama now? the number of dead are going to keep rising, and nothing is going to come of that third world country. we will be pulling out just like vietnam. i said this a long time ago.

The best way I can answer this is to say that I do regard the folks dying in Afghanistan as needless and I agree that we should be out.
However, needless is not as strong as word as murder; I hold to my original premise that we should have never gone to Iraq in the first places as the motives of Bush and especially Cheney were personal and not for the stated reasons of the WMD; therefore in a sense it was indirect murder at the very least.

[kbsooner21]

The best way I can answer this is to say that I do regard the folks dying in Afghanistan as needless and I agree that we should be out.
However, needless is not as strong as word as murder; I hold to my original premise that we should have never gone to Iraq in the first places as the motives of Bush and especially Cheney were personal and not for the stated reasons of the WMD; therefore in a sense it was indirect murder at the very least.

Not surprising

[savage1]

Not surprising

What do you want me to day-that Bush and Cheney are wonderful unselfish men, and that everything they do/did in life including the Presidecy has/had nothing to do with their own gains and bettermenn, and that motives are 100% for the betterment of mankind-NOT!!!

[Letswinalot]

My good buddies have even cooled on Obama and they were all about the so called "CHANGE".

[husker]

The best way I can answer this is to say that I do regard the folks dying in Afghanistan as needless and I agree that we should be out.
However, needless is not as strong as word as murder; I hold to my original premise that we should have never gone to Iraq in the first places as the motives of Bush and especially Cheney were personal and not for the stated reasons of the WMD; therefore in a sense it was indirect murder at the very least.

obama greatly increased the troops in afghanistan and the american deaths. i guess you feel this is justified?

[kbsooner21]

What do you want me to day-that Bush and Cheney are wonderful unselfish men, and that everything they do/did in life including the Presidecy has/had nothing to do with their own gains and bettermenn, and that motives are 100% for the betterment of mankind-NOT!!!

Just wondering when you are going to leave Bush/Cheney out of arguments... They have nothing to do with the current thread!

[husker]

I hold to my original premise that we should have never gone to Iraq in the first places as the motives of Bush and especially Cheney were personal and not for the stated reasons of the WMD; therefore in a sense it was indirect murder at the very least.

with cheney i assume you are talking about haliburton. please read this fact check article about this. they sum it up like this. the implication that Cheney has a financial interest in Halliburton is unfounded and the $2 million figure people say he got is flat wrong.

FactCheck.org: Kerry Ad Falsely Accuses Cheney on Halliburton

bush motivation is what exactly? his father?

[Jamaicanman]

with cheney i assume you are talking about haliburton. please read this fact check article about this. they sum it up like this. the implication that Cheney has a financial interest in Halliburton is unfounded and the $2 million figure people say he got is flat wrong.

FactCheck.org: Kerry Ad Falsely Accuses Cheney on Halliburton

bush motivation is what exactly? his father?

George Soros and Michael Moore have more of a vested interest in Haliburton then Cheney!!

[vitterd]

with cheney i assume you are talking about haliburton. please read this fact check article about this. they sum it up like this. the implication that Cheney has a financial interest in Halliburton is unfounded and the $2 million figure people say he got is flat wrong.

FactCheck.org: Kerry Ad Falsely Accuses Cheney on Halliburton

bush motivation is what exactly? his father?

Motivation is hard to prove. Misguided is best term for the bush/cheney war fiasco. Bad intel but the buck stops with them. They only wanted info they could use to go into iraq

I just find it odd that a guy who had a many deferments as cheney had and gw bushs spectacular job of keeping the vietnam army out of texas would have such a war mentality. Just seems somehow they were gonna justify the iraq war. Playing on the american peoples emotion over 9/11 was pathetic

[kbsooner21]

Motivation is hard to prove. Misguided is best term for the bush/cheney war fiasco. Bad intel but the buck stops with them. They only wanted info they could use to go into iraq

I just find it odd that a guy who had a many deferments as cheney had and gw bushs spectacular job of keeping the vietnam army out of texas would have such a war mentality. Just seems somehow they were gonna justify the iraq war. Playing on the american peoples emotion over 9/11 was pathetic

This right here is why Dems kill me. Most Dems want all these programs to help out people right? But in the case of going in and destroying a tyrant who beheads his own citizens, well, we shouldn't help out there?

Help me out with your line of thinking here

[vitterd]

George Soros and Michael Moore have more of a vested interest in Haliburton then Cheney!!

Now that's just crazy talk. Go look at cheney public financials with haliburton. Guy received 34 million after leaving to join bush on the ticket. Look at his personal holding then and now with haliburton. It is insane. Guy boxers prob had property of haliburton stickers on them

[husker]

Motivation is hard to prove. Misguided is best term for the bush/cheney war fiasco. Bad intel but the buck stops with them. They only wanted info they could use to go into iraq

I just find it odd that a guy who had a many deferments as cheney had and gw bushs spectacular job of keeping the vietnam army out of texas would have such a war mentality. Just seems somehow they were gonna justify the iraq war. Playing on the american peoples emotion over 9/11 was pathetic

"vietnam army out of texas"? what does this mean?


bush did the same thing every politician does, including the present president. they didn't say sadam was directly involved in 9/11, they said he supported terrorism. he did give suicide bombers families money, so that isn't a lie. they knew people that aren't that sharp will mistake what they are saying and thing 9/11 and sadam are linked, but they never actually said that. you know how politics is played. EVERYONE does it!